Re: FT: 6-arc weapons (was Graser...)

>(There's little doubt that your group finds 6-arc weapons 
>more attractive than other groups do, because between 
>the three of you Steve, you (Glen) and Andrew Apter 
>have provided about 5% of the warships designs in my 
>design archive (78 of ~1500 - the exact count depends 
>on where you draw the line between "warship" and 
>"heavily armed auxiliary" :-/ ), yet you've provided nearly 
>half of all B3s with more than 3 arcs and nearly one-third 
>of all B2-6s.)
>
>Regards,
>
>Oerjan

You're welcome!   :)  

A lot of the high-arc weapons comes from the miniatures
and previous games (i.e., Star Fleet Battles) we used to
play (for me anyway).  Steve uses WW1-WW2 era
battleship miniatures which have turrets, he uses 5-arcs,
and if the weapon comes only in a 6-arc variant (i.e.
class-1 rail guns) he does figure out the fractional
cost (and I don't mind).  For the secondaries, he should
actually have twice the number he does but each at 3-arcs
(all Port or all Starboard); but, does not half the number
of  6-arc weapons comes close enough?

Many of my designs using Star Trek based miniatures
borrow from SFB designs, which many have more than 
180 degrees (especially Klingon phasers).
Also, rear firing weapons are not uncommon in Star Trek 
movies and shows.  That "no rear firing" rule is more
of a background/universe optional rule.
Doesn't some of the B5 Earth ships have main weapons
that fire rearward? (the Omega?)

I've also designed hundreds of ships, what I've put 
up on my website is just a smidgen.  I've thrown 
away more designs than I've shown. 

Andy's designs are just... different.  I ain't gonna comment
no more on that.  :)

I also wonder if some of those designs you have from
other people are variations of the FB designs?

1/3rd of all the B2-6s?  Aren't there quite a few of
those in FB1?

I wonder what percentage of FT players play only 
vector or cinematic.  Has anyone done a poll?

Glen